x
pkumar 12/5/2012 | 1:20:11 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Major metro edge and access supplier are still upgrading the SONET ADM, XC with next generation SONET Gear that support ethernet, Fiberchannel and TDM traffic over SONET. The key technologies such as GFP-F/GFP-T, VC and LCAS extend the life of SONET. I do not see the SONET is Dead in near future.
mgillespie 12/5/2012 | 1:20:27 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead The average zx gbic with a budget for 23Db- will push 70KM quite happily. As far as 100 if your fiber splicing is good.
However, the mechanism that companies are choosing to deliver long haul ethernet solutions like this depend entirely upon the company and the type of hardware they buy.
PO 12/5/2012 | 1:20:31 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead ...if you want a circuit to possess a bandwidth greater than 3mb/s and budget over a 3 year period, ethernet is the defacto first choice for as far as 40KM with scope as high as 1Gig.

Can anyone fill me in on the technology stack being offered? 100BaseFX over SMF at 1310nm, point-to-point and unrepeatered? Something else?
mgillespie 12/5/2012 | 1:20:36 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead dadofamunky, you're missing the bigger picture. This however, does not mean that A. the picture is not truly gigantic or B. You aren't standing within a 0.5 picometre distance of the picture.
At risk of sounding boring by repeating myself, SONET is not dead, nor is it's slightly more talented sibling SDH. However:

"Ethernet and IP Services are making inroads? Where?"

Hell yeah. If inroads means gaining market share. Then ethernet products are making inroads. Once upon a time if you wanted a WAN circuit of more than 45mb/s you had to use SONET or ATM over SONET regardless of distance. Now in the UK if you want a circuit to possess a bandwidth greater than 3mb/s and budget over a 3 year period, ethernet is the defacto first choice for as far as 40KM with scope as high as 1Gig. After that, and usually only then, does SDH really start making sense.

"What about Yipes?" You say! Not the most heart warming of business stories. However, don't overlook Bredbandsbolaget, Tiscali, and now even BT really flying the flag and making ethernet a cost affective alternative.

Ethernet is really really going forwards with all kinds of leaps and bounds. However it is not, will never be, and really is stupid to suggest. A 100% alternative to SDH/SONET. The day I see a Gbic transmitting data over seas, or even over more than 200KM in anything but a hypothetical scenario, without a piece of SDH to piggy back across. Is the day I eat that very gbic.

I only continue with this rant, agreeing with everything you've said because I fail to see what the argument is that is being perpetuated.

Ethernet and SONET (MPLS being an augmentation of either)are two totally different things with totally different purposes. There just happens to be a small area of crossover that is becoming further separated due to technology advancements. Developments are taking their natural course, and product offerings are exploiting the maturation of both.
Will one kill the other? On the same day that the common house cat becomes extinct because Freds' petshop sold more puppies during the christmas break.

end rant.
m.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:20:42 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead firstmile,

Thanks for the correction.

dadofamunky 12/5/2012 | 1:20:43 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Ethernet and IP Services are making inroads? Where? Remember Yipes? How about CoSine? They make a system that pretty much does everything but there has never been sufficient demand for it. Shasta? That's a Nortel giveaway. Is there a single company anywhere that is making serious money, profitable money, off IP services?

Maybe in 30 years MPLS/Eth. will be SONET's undoing. But reliability and performance are big issues with MPLS. No OA&M with MPLS. Sorry, but without that, MPLS probably will never break out of a niche market. So what if Cisco backs it? They also sell TDM gear.
firstmile 12/5/2012 | 1:20:44 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Doug,
The EFM 802.3ah standard was ratified in June '04. It is a done deal.
...first
opticalone 12/5/2012 | 1:20:46 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead I don't know where you got your degree, Do The Math, but Wi-Fi is not a real substitution for cellular voice. Wi-Fi operates in unlicenced spectrum and is great for data, but most cellular demand remains voice only with only a small percentage used for data transfer (i.e. e-mail).

The real debate will come when WiMax gains commercial acceptance and you can reach several kilometers and be able to hand-off between Wi-Max antennaes.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:20:46 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead npuguy,

I believe that the only vendor that Iometrix has tested so far is Hatteras Networks. I also believe that the standard is in draft form (please correct me if I am wrong). A good start, but still a ways to go before it is fully baked by RBOC standards.

What this needs is a couple of good old fashioned nationwide CLECs to go out on a limb, push the envelope, and force the RBOCs to do something. Unfortunately, the founders of MFS are either retired or in the IXC business now :(
npuguy 12/5/2012 | 1:20:47 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead signmeup,

[snip]
How do I put an ethernet port in remote loopback?
[snip]

The IEEE 802.3ah (EFM) standard includes OAM capability to put an ethernet port in remote loopback. I believe Iometrix is offering compliance testing in this area as well (I don't work there)

npuguy
jim_smith 12/5/2012 | 1:20:49 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead I was speaking of the progress that it has made so far in replacing SONET as an carrier infrastructure.

I will agree with you on this one. So far MPLS/Ethernet has not posed a real threat to SONET in the core.

But, carriers are fooling around with purely MPLS/Ethernet networks that do not have any SONET in them. That's why I think one should not be too complacent.

By the way, what is your background?

A smattering of vendor and service provider experience.
priam 12/5/2012 | 1:20:50 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead But here we are, exchanging a few bytes very transiently. The point-to-point high bw service will always be important; but it's probably more tractable building p2p out of a cloud model than the other way 'round. Hence the importance of MPLS/pseudowire. Over the last ten years or so, the really interesting stuff has been falling out of reachability, not (just) speed.
-------------->
If I put a packet into a fat pipe, truck it all the way across the country, and then find out that it doesn't fit into the smaller pipe through which it's being delivered, I am wasting money. And if I've dropped another viable packet at the source end in order to transport that waste, I'm not making my customers any happier.

If I need to re-examine those packets a couple dozen times enroute (with very low entropy) because I've replaced all my SONET regens (and muxes) with routers, I'm not exactly using resources effectively either.

PO 12/5/2012 | 1:20:50 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Sure it's fun to ignore what networks have been carrying for the last several decades, but to ignore what networks have to deliver going forward seems a bit shortsighted.

If I put a packet into a fat pipe, truck it all the way across the country, and then find out that it doesn't fit into the smaller pipe through which it's being delivered, I am wasting money. And if I've dropped another viable packet at the source end in order to transport that waste, I'm not making my customers any happier.

If I need to re-examine those packets a couple dozen times enroute (with very low entropy) because I've replaced all my SONET regens (and muxes) with routers, I'm not exactly using resources effectively either.

As more traffic shifts to UDP, there is an increased need for traffic engineering on the network, and the more times you open the pipe the more complex that problem becomes.

The value of multiplexing has not been diminished. The only question is whether the cost of installing and managing multiple layers of multiplexing pays off. And I see no reason to believe that managing a SONET interface on a router will become simpler and cheaper than managing the same interface on a SONET mux.

The better headline would come from the Monty Python sketch ... Not dead yet? Getting better!
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:20:53 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Priam,

You make some good points. It certainly makes no sense, in theory, to impose a ring technology on a network that is a natural mesh, such as that in the long distance network. That's what the optical cross connect guys have been pushing for years.

I have no personal interest in seeing SONET live forever. In fact, I spent years trying to replace parts of the SONET network with DWDM. We succeeded in taking a pretty good bite.


priam 12/5/2012 | 1:20:53 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Though "SONET is dead" is intentionally inflammatory, the point is that SONET is becoming more and more a link technology, - the rings, so to speak, are becoming binodal. The network is more and more packet oriented, with switches and routers at the interstices, pushing the fat, dumb pipes toward fat, dumb clouds with smart stuff everywhere you can reach...

----->
The success of MPLS does not neccesarily mean the undoing of SONET. Both IP and MPLS can run over either Ethernet or SONET as a transport layer.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:20:54 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead jim_smith,

When I said that Ethernet has a long way to go, I wasn't speaking of the capabilities of the technology. I was speaking of the progress that it has made so far in replacing SONET as an carrier infrastructure.

Of course, both SONET and Ethernet will be replaced some day ;)

By the way, what is your background?
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:20:55 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Jim_smith,

The success of MPLS does not neccesarily mean the undoing of SONET. Both IP and MPLS can run over either Ethernet or SONET as a transport layer.

I never underestimate Cisco. However, Cisco has yet to prove that they can translate their dominance in datacom to a dominance in Telecdom. I wouldn't count them out, but they cannot dictate what happens in Telecom like they can in datacom.
signmeup 12/5/2012 | 1:21:00 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead jim_smith,

Unfortunately, engineering issues usually dictate service capabilities. How do I put an ethernet port in remote loopback?

Until someone defines a way make management ubiquitous across the last mile, ethernet still has a long way to go.

signmeup
jim_smith 12/5/2012 | 1:21:01 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Ethernet is getting better but it has a long ways to go as well.

There is no fundamental technology difference between XYZ/MPLS/Ethernet vs. XYZ/SONET in terms of providing service to the end user. It is only an engineering issue.

Cisco is trying very hard. If they keep on trying, they will get there eventually.

I don't think it will happen within a year, but I don't think it will take 10 years either.

This might be one of those rare occasions where Europe/Japan/South Korea end up leading the way.
somedumbPM 12/5/2012 | 1:21:01 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead You netheads be careful with those GBICs that go 4000km without regen. You could poke an eye out - hehe.

Also the FCC fines telcos by a formula for outages. Something like # of lines down X length of time down X an amount that will make you say 5 9's isn;t enuff and if it's E911 office yikes! That'll make the water pretty cold when ya first dip ya toe in it.

Nothing like having a virus take out a call server at a 911 call center and no analog lines around.

Sonet may die, but it will not be anytime soon. It will be interesting how it all plays out for sure though. Ethernet is getting better but it has a long ways to go as well.
jim_smith 12/5/2012 | 1:21:01 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Ethernet and IP services are certainly making inroads in replacing T1s, T3s, and OC-Ns as a service. The vast majority of those services, however, still relay on SONET to move the bits accross the city or the country. This is not to say that some form of Ethernet (or something else) will not replace SONET some day, but it has a long way to go.

Let's not get too carried away with this kind of thinking.

MPLS/Ethernet may prove to be SONET's undoing. MPLS/Ethernet has Cisco's backing, and I don't think it is a good idea to underestimate Cisco.
5514DD 12/5/2012 | 1:21:03 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Doug,

Thanks for your reply. I found it very informative and helpful and don't worry, I wasn't insulted. It's amazing how good you can be working for a "box-builder" but never really understand some of the subtleties (or not-so-subtleties) of a carrier network.

Very much appreciated.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:21:06 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Sure, I'll take a stab at explaining. Let's use an over-simplified but real life example (please don't be insulted). In the past, if you were an enterprise customer and wanted to build an IP netowrk between two sites, your service provider would sell you a connection that "fit" into their SONET based architecture (T1, T3, OC-3, etc.). Lets say they give you an OC-3 connection between the two sites. To make it an IP connection you hooked your own routers up on each end and connected them to your LANs via an Ethernet. The "service" that you bough was an OC-3.

Now, lets say that you don't want an OC-3. You want the service provider to give you an Ethernet based dedicated IP service between those two sites. Guess how it's was first (and sometimes still is) done? The service provider connects the two sites with an OC-3, sticks a router on each end, and hands you the ethernet port.

Has IP and Ethernet "replaced" the OC-3(SONET)? No, the network is exactly the same. The service provider has changed the "service" by sticking a router on the edge of the SONET based network.

What about Frame Relay services? Typically, a FRAD at the customer site connects to a frame relay switch at a central office using... a SONET based connection. ATM..ditto.

So, one poster stated that BT's offering of Ethernet services and Level 3's IP network were examples of the demise of SONET. In fact, BT's Ethernet service does hand the customer an Ethernet connection, but then runs it over their SDH (European version of SONET) network using Alcatel equipment. Level Three's own website shows that they build their IP network by connecting their routers over SONET connections.

This kind of mistaken logic is very typical. There are two parts of the equation: the service, and the transport network that is used to carry that service.

Ethernet and IP services are certainly making inroads in replacing T1s, T3s, and OC-Ns as a service. The vast majority of those services, however, still relay on SONET to move the bits accross the city or the country. This is not to say that some form of Ethernet (or something else) will not replace SONET some day, but it has a long way to go.

Hope this helps.
rjs 12/5/2012 | 1:21:09 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Very well put. I have stopped trying to
explain little things that an average network
engineer ought to know. It is the simple concept of
convergence. SONET/SDH is a service that the transport layer uses. It is the dominant transport layer as native ATM or IP is non-existant on long or intermediate hauls. That is not to say it won't change, but if it does it will do so gradually over years. SONET is not dead and likewise neither is IP and I don't care to comment about ATM.

The engineers know it, those who are making noise
are the ones who are not techies or have their own agendas and will never get it.


It really quite simple and analogies exist to explain this to laymen, and I will not bother since I was never known for being a pedagogue!

So guys, just treat the headline as you would reading the headlines on the National Inquirer.

-rjs
5514DD 12/5/2012 | 1:21:10 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Doug,

"Many people can't seem to understand the difference between the services offered (leased line, ethetnet, ATM, POTs) and the transport infrastructure on which they are built. This will not change as most of them actually think they understand and therefore see no need to be educated."

Want to take a stab at explaining?

I'm curious.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:21:12 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead CoolLightGeek,

You need explain your last points because some won't follow your links and those who do might still not get it.

BT's Ethernet services are built on an SDH infrastructure, and LVLT's IP backbone uses SONET as it's transport infrastructure.

Many people can't seem to understand the difference between the services offered (leased line, ethetnet, ATM, POTs) and the transport infrastructure on which they are built. This will not change as most of them actually think they understand and therefore see no need to be educated.
CoolLightGeek 12/5/2012 | 1:21:14 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Materialgirl-
Get a clue:
"BT is building a new network for Ethernet services, and ATT seems to be outsourcing everything to LVLT."

BT is using Alcatel products including SDH MSPs to deliver their Enet Services.
Check out: http://www.home.alcatel.com/vp...
As to LVLT, check out http://www.level3.com/673.html and click on IP Backbone.

Every carrier of any size views SONET/SDH as a critical component of their networks and is blending SONET and Ethernet into their networks including your "flagship" examples.
SONET/SDH is the ubiquitous means to handoff digital streams between carriers.
This will not change anytime soon. Once traffic is bundled, the silicon for digital pipes are much cheaper and more reliable for volume traffic as compared to sending everything through giant packet switches. This will not change. Most NetHeads have trouble imagining what is takes to scale beyond a campus network- it requires many technologies beyond Ethernet.
dadofamunky 12/5/2012 | 1:21:17 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead How effective is it? Does it provide coloring and differentiated queuing? Or is it similar to the basic diffserv method? I'll go look up the standard myself when I have time.

I think "fairly good job" isn't really good enough. Like it or not, telcos demand reliability, because revenues depend on it. I wonder if it isn't a band-aid approach to a fundamentally broken architecture, somewhat like MPLS is to the problem of shortest-path congestion. It still hasn't convinced ATM-heads to switch.

Also, a lot depends on the silicon vendors. WRR and WRED have been around for some years but there still really isn't a broadly deployed
solution reflecting those standards.

As much as I love IP, I think the telcos need to be given a little more credit. They need to keep their customers happy or they go out of business. Why shouldn't they continue to amortize an existing SONET infrastructure that has well-established protection mechanisms, when throwing it away for an unproven Ethernet solution presents unclear advantages?

My 2c

"Resilient Packet Ring / IEEE 802.17 does a fairly good job of providing the 50 mSec protection switching attribute of SONET and you can use cheap Ethernet PHYs on your ring. RPR has QoS built in so it's a reasonable platform to do VoIP distribution in the metro area. Since redundancy and QoS are built into the link layer, you don't necessarily have to muck with IP routing or MPLS so the boxes that push the bits around can be relatively cheap bridges instead of expensive routers. It's not optimized for TDM data but the trend is that TDM is being replaced by VoIP among the IXCs."
materialgirl 12/5/2012 | 1:21:20 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead If you want to predict the future, look to current behavior. On the cell phone front, a raft of new devices will combine WiFi with either GSM or CDMA by Q4 of this year. By then, you will not need two devices to access both air interfaces. The threat is implied: if you increase costs, I MAY move my traffic. That is enough to cap rates in a competitive market, wihle bandwidth usage soars.

As to the SONET-to-Ethernet migration, it may indeed occur in a "flash cut-over". BT is building a new network for Ethernet services, and ATT seems to be outsourcing everything to LVLT. The only carriers trying to merge the two are the RBOC voice-centric types who do not yet understand the dynamics of selling IP services.

Finally, Web service based enterprise applications require the bandwidth of ethernet to function. Since they are asynchronous, message-based applications, they do not require high quality. Voice will ride invisibly in this Web service sludge.
mrcasual 12/5/2012 | 1:21:23 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Ethernet QoS is like a pimped-out Hyundai. You bought the car because it is cheap. Some guys think the chicks are gonna dig it, but most of the time it's a halfassed implementation and doesn't get anyone any action.

I laughed out loud at this because not only is it funny, but it's also accurate. On both fronts.

Is there any way to give a post a 10 rating?
greyhair 12/5/2012 | 1:21:23 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead > cellular margins *are* finished.

Probably true, for more reasons than just WiFi.
But that does not mean that cellular is done. I want to see your hand-off performance on WiFi...

> "Bells are doing just fine" - that is news to me. Last I heard, they are losing access lines like crazy, and it is accelerating.

Partially true. Losing access lines, but gaining DSL. I tossed my second line in favor of Vonage over my existing DSL service. DSL has gained slightly on Cable in the past six months. I do not know how well they are doing on margin, but I am quite happy with my DSL service. Yes, it is a little slower (at peak) than Cable, but it is plenty fast for my use and only 2/3 the price.
Also, in three years, my down time has been zero.

Let me know when WiMax is actually deployed. Until then, I am not holding my breath.
opticalwatcher 12/5/2012 | 1:21:25 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Sorry about the last post--slip of the mouse.
-------------
"Bells are doing just fine" - that is news to me. Last I heard, they are losing access lines like crazy, and it is accelerating. Serves them right, for all their arrogance and outmoded ITUtitudes."
-------------
Gee, did you bother to check your facts before posting? Here's a couple of articles for your enjoyment:
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103...
http://www.journalnow.com/serv...

-----------------
If 50% of cellular traffic moves to Wi-Fi (my rough estimate is that at least 50% of cellular calls are made within buildings), cellular margins *are* finished.
-----------------

So you're saying that since 50% of cellular calls are made within buildings, they'll be made by a WiFi phone. The other 50% will be made by cell phone presumably. The problem is that this requires you to carry around two phones and have two phone numbers. (Unless you think that there are two kinds of people: those that spend their entire life inside buildings and those who spend their entire life on the road. This might mathematically explain your logic).

Actually, if I'm at work, I use the work phone on my desk. I think I spend about 3% of my time at a place where I could conceivably use a WiFi phone. The cell phone is required at all other times, so I don't think the cell phone companies are too worried about losing my business. Maybe you're one of those who spends all their time in buildings without a work phone. I suggest you get out more.

opticalwatcher 12/5/2012 | 1:21:25 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead >"Bells are doing just fine" - that is news to >me. Last I heard, they are losing access lines >like crazy, and it is accelerating. Serves them >right, for all their arrogance and outmoded ITUtitudes.
alchemy 12/5/2012 | 1:21:25 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Personally, I think SONET is going to vanish in many networks. 10GigE is going to ride the typical Ethernet price curve and interfaces will be cheap and ubiquitous. There will never be enough SONET gear to drive the prices down.

Resilient Packet Ring / IEEE 802.17 does a fairly good job of providing the 50 mSec protection switching attribute of SONET and you can use cheap Ethernet PHYs on your ring. RPR has QoS built in so it's a reasonable platform to do VoIP distribution in the metro area. Since redundancy and QoS are built into the link layer, you don't necessarily have to muck with IP routing or MPLS so the boxes that push the bits around can be relatively cheap bridges instead of expensive routers. It's not optimized for TDM data but the trend is that TDM is being replaced by VoIP among the IXCs.

DoTheMath 12/5/2012 | 1:21:26 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead "Wait till WiFi finishes off the margins in cellular."
tera wrote>

When your car breaks down on some backwater road, you've got a long walk to the nearest Starbucks so you can call for help on your WiFi phone.

Oh, and DSL has long been in a price war with Cable, and the Bells are doing just fine, thank you.
---
I said "it will finish off the *margins*" in cellular, not "finish off cellular". Read it carefully before mouthing off. If 50% of cellular traffic moves to Wi-Fi (my rough estimate is that at least 50% of cellular calls are made within buildings), cellular margins *are* finished.

"Bells are doing just fine" - that is news to me. Last I heard, they are losing access lines like crazy, and it is accelerating. Serves them right, for all their arrogance and outmoded ITUtitudes.
laserbrain2 12/5/2012 | 1:21:26 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead >>"Network managers won't accept the bandwidth without the control," he said. "This will be a very different market than the 90s, where bandwidth was everything," Stitt said.

Stanley emphasized that point in a later session, noting that Gigabit Ethernet had been presented to the world as a "dumb pipe" that happened to be really fast. The same tactic won't work this time. "We've now moved on to 10 Gbit/s, and QOS is important because of the new applications," he said.
<<

Ahh the classic Ethernet myth. We've been b.s.ing about Ethernet QOS for ten years now. Gotta do something to differentiate the commodity. The fact is, it is almost always easier to throw another link at the problem rather than come up with some scheme for prioritizing some bits over others; it has to get configured and tested and monitored and tweaked.

Stanley's quote is the best, they didn't use QoS at 1Gig even though we thumnped about it but now they will because the 10x improvement in bandwidth is going to be consumed by some "new applications." What new applications? Napster?

Ethernet QoS is like a pimped-out Hyundai. You bought the car because it is cheap. Some guys think the chicks are gonna dig it, but most of the time it's a halfassed implementation and doesn't get anyone any action.
stephenpcooke 12/5/2012 | 1:21:27 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Here is something that I have been saying for over 10 years now:

"SONET will die, but it will be killed by SDH."

My reasoning was the global expansion of the various big players in the US, keeping operations costs down by buying a single type of equipment (ie: SONET vs. SDH). These reasons have pretty much disappeared but the imminent death of Telcordia may bring it about sooner rather than later. Unless the industry as a whole can figure out what to do with the standards part of Telcordia, SONET may well die.

As most line interface ASICs have supported both SONET & SDH via a software switch for many years now, there may well be some new software releases that re-configure networks from SONET to SDH.

Food for thought.

Steve.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:21:28 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead "can say is that can anyone name a SINGLE router vendor that can legitimately claim 5 9's?"

daofamunky,

It's much more than just 5 9's reliability on the equipment side. That's actually the easier part. It's the reliability of the network as a whole thats much more complex in the telco world.

On the other hand, I have to agree that there are many things about the culture of the RBOCs that we could live without. Even the RBOCs themselves would like to change faster.
dadofamunky 12/5/2012 | 1:21:28 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Douggreen wrote:

"Most Bellheads don't understand how the relatives simplicity of an enterprise makes their operating systems and hardware seem like overkill. Most enterprise (and Internet) people don't understand what it means to manage billions of connections and a network that covers hundreds of thousands of route-miles. To them it's just a "cloud" that is always there."

Douggreen, that is just about the best summary of the two camps I've ever seen. I've worked on the data side for some time and just jumped over to a company that's a lot closer to the telco side; all I can say is that can anyone name a SINGLE router vendor that can legitimately claim 5 9's?

Didn't think so.

OTOH, if it wasn't for the IP guys the telcos would not be FINALLY offering better broadband options and being forced to compete and change their operations as much as they are.
mgillespie 12/5/2012 | 1:21:29 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead [email protected]#
I agree, long gone are the days that when a 20Km piece of dark fiber is purchased everyone bricks themselves. We no longer need to purchase expensive SDH/SONET tin to spit a packet further than across the corridor.
Despite this, and speaking as a 'nethead' I can't help but cough when everyone starts shouting for the death of all things telco. It's just not going to happen any time soon.

IP kit is edging it's way in from the outside inwards, I agree! But an absolute death of SONET? Grow up.

Seasons change my friends, and as they do new technologies shall emerge and mature. However, not only are 90% of ethernet based l2 mpls vpns carried using IPoverSDH, I am not seeing options on GBICs suitable for transcontinental interlinks.
Telco equipment has had eons to mature, and provides SLA's that IP equipment isn't even close to meeting.
I agree, Ethernet is kicking butt, and shall not reach it's zenith for quite some time. I disagree that SONET is dead.
opticalwatcher 12/5/2012 | 1:21:29 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead "Wait till WiFi finishes off the margins in cellular."

When your car breaks down on some backwater road, you've got a long walk to the nearest Starbucks so you can call for help on your WiFi phone.

Oh, and DSL has long been in a price war with Cable, and the Bells are doing just fine, thank you.
douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:21:30 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead CoolLightGeek,

THere is never an appreciation by one side of the other. Part of one of my jobs in a past life was to manage the relationship of my company (fiber optics) and a data company. I was chosen for this because I had worked on the data side for 15 years before moving to telecom.

The optics company thought that they brought more value to the table. Router code, hey, you can download that for free off the Internet. (I assume that none of them ever tried to get the GateD version of BGP to work).

The data company though that SONET was an interface chip that you put on a router. And optics, doesn't that come from sand that you can pick up on the beach? (they later learned the hard way when they tried to get into the optics business).

Most Bellheads don't understand how the relatives simplicity of an enterprise makes their operating systems and hardware seem like overkill. Most enterprise (and Internet) people don't understand what it means to manage billions of connections and a network that covers hundreds of thousands of route-miles. To them it's just a "cloud" that is always there.



DoTheMath 12/5/2012 | 1:21:30 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead CoolLightGeek:
The revolution died? It has just gotten started. Telcordia is the first domino to fall. Wait for ever more ruthless price cutting on all forms of value-padded Bellheadware. Voice is just a free application - my Costco card or Shell gas card would some day include unlimited VOIP calling just for the privilege of signing up for the card and buying groceries/gas.

The Bells think they found a refuge in DSL and Wireless. Wait till WiFi finishes off the margins in cellular ($20 nationwide unlimited, anyone?), and DSL getting into price war with Cable and/or Wimax. Bells are toast, unless they import some serious Nethead thinking and get rid of their ITUtidue. This time, the lecture will be given by people like us. There is justice in this world, after all!

-- Not-the-inner-voice-of-John-Chambers.

douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:21:31 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead dodo, Scott, et all,

In spite of the fact that I recieved my high school and undergraduate education in the state of Alabama, I do understand the conept of hyperbole ;) In fact, I have been accused of it (rightly) many times in my former career in Marketing.

What I always tried to do, however, is make sure that I didn't go so far over the edge that I lost credibility, especially with my customers.

These arguements often show an ignorance of the differences between services and infrastructure, Switching technology and transport, framing and routing, etc. Sometimes this is real ignorance. Sometimes the individual really knows the differences, but ignore them to make their point (I am sure that Stitt is extremely smart and knows the real scoop).

I don't want to fall into the same trap, but I will risk it by saying this: SONET network elements are being forced to incorporate data technology, and Ethernet is being forced to incorporate elements of SONET framing and management.

We can all sit back and be entertained while the marketing guys spend huge amounts of time and money arguing over the nomenclature of what we are shooting for: data friendly SONET or carrier class Ethernet.




CoolLightGeek 12/5/2012 | 1:21:31 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead DotheMath,
Your disdain for the Bells is common among NetHeads. And it is a major reason why I am not worried about NetHead companies taking over Telecom.

The Bells are the ones with most of the money to spend on telecom. Blending technologies and evolutionary approaches that take into account existing network and operations value are the only ones that will be successful.

Any slight opportunity for revolution died when the bubble burst. No one has deep enough pockets nor enough ignorance to try that again for at least a long while.

Getting the best out of both Ethernet and SONET working together will be the drivers for a significant portion of telecom for at least another 10 years.

One man's swamp is another man's beautiful lake full of livelihood. I appreciate you moving back to an environment you appreciate: I do wish you would stop dis'ing mine.

CLG
indianajones 12/5/2012 | 1:21:33 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Stitt must be smoking something here. SONET has made far more advancements (GFP, LCAS, VT1.5 et al.) and the price points have dropped considerably as well. In fact next-gen SONET platforms have become very competitive and are threatening packet based architectures.

I understand that Stitt must make some wild remarks to get attraction but he needs to be a little grounded in reality as well
DoTheMath 12/5/2012 | 1:21:34 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Here is from someone who was in IP and data networking, got suckered into telecom during the bubble (against better judgement, against the instinct that said "Ethernet/IP will rule"), and now back to data networking & IT, and doing well again, thank you. I hope Sonet dies, and along with it takes the Bells and the Bellheads and the Telcordias. Good riddance to all of them. I have met many of these types, and all I have seen is "carrier class" public sector arrogance with the "I need a manual to go the bathroom" attitude. I have banned "carrier class" in my circles. Thank God the bubble burst and we got out of that swamp. No, this is not John Chambers' inner voice talking ;-)
CoolLightGeek 12/5/2012 | 1:21:37 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead So if SONET is dead, why does the 10K filing indicate R&D includes SONET???
Are LR readers being misled or just Extreme Network investors?
www.extremenetworks.com/aboutu... :


Our product development activities focus on solving the needs of enterprises, service providers and metropolitan area network markets. Current activities include the continuing development of a next-generation chipset aimed at extending the capabilities of our products. Our ongoing research activities cover a broad range of areas, including, in particular, 10 Gigabit Ethernet and SONET, metropolitan network and Internet routing software, ASIC design, network management software, broadband access equipment, wireless networking equipment and content networking devices.

Scott Raynovich 12/5/2012 | 1:21:37 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead "Why the religious fanaticism? Why must Ethernets' success depend on the demise of SONET?"

Doug... that's easy... because it makes for better headlines!!
dodo 12/5/2012 | 1:21:37 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead Doug

We have to take these naive (instead of saying stupid)comments like Stitt's with a smile.

We just have to see the state of the Telecomm industry to realize that the people coming from the IT arena think that they have the answer and/or solution for everything. Just ask them to differentiate IP from cct switching or TDM.

We have a lot of examples from the bubble years to see that knowledge of data or networking does not make one an expert in TELECOMs.

but the world is still turning...........

douggreen 12/5/2012 | 1:21:38 AM
re: Stitt: Sonet's Even More Dead I can just see Stitt standing on the deck of an aircraft carrier under a banner that reads "Sonet is Dead".

Why the religious fanaticism? Why must Ethernets' success depend on the demise of SONET?

In fact, if you succeed in positioning the argument as "Ethernet or SONET", you are giving the SONET vendors a gun to shoot you with. Talk about how Ethernet is evolving to work with the existing network, not against it.

Why can't we all just get along? :)









HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE